I am pretty sure that throughout the course of history nobody every changed another man's opinion by starting off by calling him an idiot.
Ok, I have no real evidence of that but I am pretty sure it wouldn't work with me and I am, on more than a few occasions, an idiot. Extrapolating from there I can guess that a lot of people are going to be offended and not persuaded by this.
So when someone states from the top that the other side is an idiot you can be pretty sure they are not trying to convince anyone. My belief is they are trying to start an argument. The point of the argument is to prove the theory that they just espoused, which is everyone who disagrees with them is an idiot.
Thus whatever evidence or opinion that comes from the other side is immaterial because it is really just evidence that the argument's initiator is right…my opponent’s are idiots.
What makes this ok is that the people arguing from the other side think that the guy who started the argument is an idiot as well. They are arguing to prove the guy is an idiot but don’t realize they are reinforcing the guys original assertion.
Thus no matter what the topic it is they are arguing, what position or stance they have, what they are really saying is that everyone who disagrees with them is an idiot. The argument is window dressing for a classic child’s argument:
You’re an idiot.
No, I’m not…you’re an idiot. Repeat. Rinse.
Let’s settle the debate right here and now. You are both idiots.
Now, what does that leave us? Well, we could try reasonable discourse and realize that it is entirely plausible that an intelligent people could disagree with something that seems so obvious to both sides.
That doesn’t sound like nearly as much fun.
I know...I know...I'm an idiot.
Now, back to your regularly scheduled argument.